Officials really bad today!

[lighthouse]

You guys know my stand as far as officiating goes, and for most games they do a good job. Not so today, and why I say that is probably different than most of you saw it.

First, let me start with the missed fumble call. Anytime you see an official who is on the play, make no movement, or blow his whistle, he has no idea what just happened. That's what happened to the side judge on that play. He just stood there and made no movement to spot the ball, throw a beanbag, or anything for maybe 5 seconds which is an eternity for an official. Then he took a couple steps forward, shook his head, and spotted the ball. Now, what happened when the play was reviewed, I have no idea because the ball was clearly fumbled before he was down, and while he was still moving forward.

Second, on the late hit. It was really close but the player had just stepped OB before he was hit, and I'm not sure the UK player could have stopped. Both officials on the play threw flags, so I have to guess they were looking at the severity of the hit.

Holding could be called on just about every play and I don't remember a holding call I disagreed with, although there were several that were not called that I thought were there, but for both teams.

I would guess that the officials know this wasn't their best game, and they will look at the film and hopefully be better for it. But, because I always call them like I see them, the were really bad today.

[ryanebelhar]

I always love your official reviews Lighthouse :)

[Wildcat Larry]

Not gonna disagree with you at all, Lighthouse. ;)

What about the call on UK when they hit the Vandy player out of bounds, but then they turn around and Vandy hits the UK player out of bounds. A flag on UK, but no flag on Vandy. Very inconsistent, the worse sort of bad an officiating crew can be.

Being bad is bad, but being inconsistently bad is even worse. I think the SEC assigned their worse crew to this game because it was UK and Vandy. Bad call by the conference office and they should be flagged for it.

Good report.

[crice561]

The worst officiated game Ive seen in awhile.

[misterbluecat]

I agree. This was a very inconsistent game. Quite possibly one of the worst I have seen in the past 5 years.

[lighthouse]

Not gonna disagree with you at all, Lighthouse. ;)

What about the call on UK when they hit the Vandy player out of bounds, but then they turn around and Vandy hits the UK player out of bounds. A flag on UK, but no flag on Vandy. Very inconsistent, the worse sort of bad an officiating crew can be.

Being bad is bad, but being inconsistently bad is even worse. I think the SEC assigned their worse crew to this game because it was UK and Vandy. Bad call by the conference office and they should be flagged for it.

Good report.

I agree Larry, but there was a big difference in the severity of the 2 plays and to be honest, I'm not sure whether that makes a difference. I'll find out.

[boomdaddy]

I honestly thought it was one of those crews that have been bribed by UT to make calls against UK, all of these years.

[Trueblujr]

What about those pass interference penalties in that same drive as the "late hit". All three of those penalties kept that drive alive for Vandy. both of those Pass Interference penalties came on 3rd down stops. According to Picoro on the radio, they were pretty crappy calls.

[bwright]

Combining the play on the field, the officiating and the announcing on television, this was one of the worst games I have ever watched. I really had a tough time staying in it. Of course my love for the Cats kept me interested, but everything else was terrible. On the fumble that everyone knows was a fumble, the announcer actually wondered out loud whether or not it would be better for us if it weren't a fumble. I am thrilled the Cats won, but hope I never have to watch another game as bad as this again.

[Chaz]

I have a question about two of the pass interference calls where it ball was spoted at or near the infraction. There was no assessed additional yards, but only an automatic 1st down. One of the infractions was at or near the LOS. How is this? This was in the 3rd Q and Vandy was deep in their own teritory.

[chworld22]

It was a terribly called game both ways. I just got back from the game so I got to see it up close and personal. That TO call when Vandy scored was one of the worst I have seen in a good while! I thought the interferance calls were pretty bad as well. But being at the game I didn't get as good a look at them as some of you did I am sure.

[RV]

I hardly ever mention officiating but this crew - especially the H guy - was horrid - absolutely and criminally horrid. :tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3:

[gerntz]

You guys know my stand as far as officiating goes, and for most games they do a good job. Not so today, and why I say that is probably different than most of you saw it.

First, let me start with the missed fumble call. Anytime you see an official who is on the play, make no movement, or blow his whistle, he has no idea what just happened. That's what happened to the side judge on that play. He just stood there and made no movement to spot the ball, throw a beanbag, or anything for maybe 5 seconds which is an eternity for an official. Then he took a couple steps forward, shook his head, and spotted the ball. Now, what happened when the play was reviewed, I have no idea because the ball was clearly fumbled before he was down, and while he was still moving forward.

Second, on the late hit. It was really close but the player had just stepped OB before he was hit, and I'm not sure the UK player could have stopped. Both officials on the play threw flags, so I have to guess they were looking at the severity of the hit.

Holding could be called on just about every play and I don't remember a holding call I disagreed with, although there were several that were not called that I thought were there, but for both teams.

I would guess that the officials know this wasn't their best game, and they will look at the film and hopefully be better for it. But, because I always call them like I see them, the were really bad today.

Well I'm glad to hear you say this as I highly respect your views on this.

As far as the non-fumble & the delayed reaction by the official, wasn't the play all over when he didn't throw his beanbag & spotted the ball? There never was a beanbag throw by any official that I saw, again indicating no fumble. I also heard on TV early the second half that UK got their challenge on this play back because the wasn't reviewable because the runner was ruled down. But OK, if that's the case, why did they review it??? Mistake on top of mistake.

[gerntz]

I agree Larry, but there was a big difference in the severity of the 2 plays and to be honest, I'm not sure whether that makes a difference. I'll find out.

Light, not sure you're talking the same play as Larry. He's referring to he two first half near-identical plays in front of the Vandy bench, not Cobb's hit on the UK sideline.

I agree with Larry. The plays were the same - no difference in out of bounds timing nor degree of hit & they call it on us in front of Vandy bench and not on them in front of Vandy bench. Announcers immediately after said same thing. I can only describe it as cowardly reffing.

[gerntz]

Combining the play on the field, the officiating and the announcing on television, this was one of the worst games I have ever watched. I really had a tough time staying in it. Of course my love for the Cats kept me interested, but everything else was terrible. On the fumble that everyone knows was a fumble, the announcer actually wondered out loud whether or not it would be better for us if it weren't a fumble. I am thrilled the Cats won, but hope I never have to watch another game as bad as this again.

I give the announcers a break. I think they had very little broadcast support compared to what national network announcers do. Clearly no one was spotting penalty calls for them or relaying info from the field. Then commercials run past when play restarted & we missed a TD or two live. It was a 1960's era quality broadcast.

[gerntz]

Given the perceived hits we took on the officiating, it makes our performance better than it appeared.

[POEKLM]

The officicating was the only wrinkle in a great great day for me.
I nearly lost my mind a couple times when Vandy was making those last plays and the crew would not even think about measuring....just signal the first down and play on. It seemed as though they were trying to help Vandy get bowl elligible.

[Doug Hardin]

I don't like Bill Simmons of ESPN.com as much as I did a few years ago, but I still read all of his columns out of habit. Anyway, here's what he said about the officiating in the Colts-Patriots game last week:

So let's just settle on the word "fishy." That Pats-Colts game was a little fishy. In fact, it passed six of the seven checkmarks on the Fishy Officiating Test. Here are those checkmarks, which I just made up 90 seconds ago:


The fans of the team about to get screwed need to worry even before the game, "I hope we win this one handily because there's no way in hell we're getting a call."

You need a series of inexplicable calls spread throughout the game.

The officiating needs to be so reprehensibly bad that the fans of the team-getting-screwed are calling/e-mailing/complaining/texting each other with comments like, "Oh my God, this is fixed!" midway through the game even before the next few horrendously one-sided calls happen.

There needs to be one call (in Sunday's case, the Samuel call) that makes you flash back to the shady offsides call in "Victory" when the British announcer screams, "The goal has been disallowed! The goal has been disallowed!"

The announcers need to openly question what's happening, as it's happening, at least three or four times.

You need a lingering feeling afterward that something fishy occurred, mainly because there was a clear motive for the biased officiating in the first place.

The targeted team needs to lose so its fans will spend the rest of eternity complaining about how they were screwed in the game.So how do these apply to yesterday's game?

Yes. I think as UK fans we get that feeling before every game.
Yes. The late-hits and pass interference penalties, plus the long gains negated by holding.
Yes. I heard and said that a few times.
Yes. It's hard to decide here between the holding penalty that disallowed the long gain to Burton or the second pass interference that kept Vandy's last TD drive alive.
Yes? I was at the game and didn't hear the announcers, but some posts in this thread seem to indicate that was the case.
Maybe. Perhaps the SEC office wants as many bowl eligible teams as possible, and Vandy needs one more win while UK already has 6.
No. Thank God.

[Gtownstoney]

Combining the play on the field, the officiating and the announcing on television, this was one of the worst games I have ever watched. I really had a tough time staying in it.

Agree wholeheartedly. On the TV coverage, lousy camera work; many missed plays with commercials running long. Bush league.

And, though there's no proof of course, it sure looked like those refs were trying to fix this game. And I've seen a lot of UK teams get hosed over the years. Just the sheer number of calls, plus the odd plays that favored Vandy.

I don't know how an official can not hear a time out with a player and the entire coaching staff screaming in his ear. This one burns me the most.

[bellbrass]

There have been times in UK football history when I have wondered whether the officials have been paid off. Then I think that if this really went on, it would have been exposed long ago - officials getting paid off to throw a game would be the scoop of the century, the type of investigative journalism that dances in the heads of reporters everywhere. Somebody somewhere would have been caught by now.

Yesterdays' officiating was just a train wreck of incompetency, and little else.

[Wildcat Larry]

I have a question about two of the pass interference calls where it ball was spoted at or near the infraction. There was no assessed additional yards, but only an automatic 1st down. One of the infractions was at or near the LOS. How is this? This was in the 3rd Q and Vandy was deep in their own teritory.
I'm not Lighthouse, but I think if the pass interference is less than 15 yards from the line of scrimmage the ball is placed at the spot of the pass interference and the team given a 1st down. If the foul is over 15 yards from the line of scrimmage, then the 15 yards are assessed from the line of scrimmage and the team given a 1st down.

Thus, you can get a pass interference 3 yards down field on a third and 20 and still get a first down.

I think this is the way it works.

[baldcat]

I don't know if the refs were corrupt or just incompetent.

But it was very obvious that the calls were vastly going to Vandy.

You'd think that incompetence would swing both ways.

[Chaz]

I'm not Lighthouse, but I think if the pass interference is less than 15 yards from the line of scrimmage the ball is placed at the spot of the pass interference and the team given a 1st down. If the foul is over 15 yards from the line of scrimmage, then the 15 yards are assessed from the line of scrimmage and the team given a 1st down.

Thus, you can get a pass interference 3 yards down field on a third and 20 and still get a first down.

I think this is the way it works.
Thanks for the explaination Larry. That sounds reasonable, just have never noticed it being called that way before.

[poodoo]

As far as the non-fumble & the delayed reaction by the official, wasn't the play all over when he didn't throw his beanbag & spotted the ball? There never was a beanbag throw by any official that I saw, again indicating no fumble. I also heard on TV early the second half that UK got their challenge on this play back because the wasn't reviewable because the runner was ruled down. But OK, if that's the case, why did they review it??? Mistake on top of mistake.

First, thanks, lighthouse. :)

Too, gerntz, in regard to the fumble that was not called a fumble, CJ beat writer Brett Dawson noted that the whistle had possibly been blown (why--who knows!), which makes the play unreviewable. Yet, at the time UK lost a timeout, besides having had used its only challenge.

In the third quarter, though, an official told Coach Brooks that he had not been charged with the failed challenge, for the play had been unreviewable. It had obviously been poor officiating. Without the loss of a timeout UK would have still had another timeout remaining and would have possibly had a chance to score a touchdown. Thank goodness, Mr. Seiber was able to make the long field-goal attempt and let us go into the locker room with some momentum.

In regard to the timeout's not having been called, I laughed as I read Coach Brooks' words about that, for I can just picture him and that dry wit of his. :) His words, quoted by Dawson, were as follows:

"We had Shomari Moore signaling timeout. I run down on the field SCREAMING (for) timeout, and no one heard me or saw me. And then I got flagged for being out there and probably for what I said after they didn't get the timeout. THEY HEARD ME THEN." :icon_lol:

Same as it was for POEKLM, except for the officiating, how I enjoyed the day! :) Also, many thanks to POEKLM for making it possible! :) Besides finding me a ticket, she met me just outside Nashville and did the harder part of the driving (and I was "pushing it" with Mr. Poodoo in driving myself that far with essentially one arm available for use AND driving back at night :icon_lol:). Too, thank you, Cats, for making the trip most rewarding! :)

GO CATS!!!

[RV]

I don't know how an official can not hear a time out with a player and the entire coaching staff screaming in his ear. This one burns me the most.

It's easy - just ignore them pretend it's not happening. Ya know, kind'a like the H-man did yesterday.

[BamaCat86]

This was actually Alabama's personal officiating crew but they were mistakenly assigned to the Vandy-UK game and it cost Bama dearly in Starkvegas.

I laugh because during the Alabama-LSU game last week, it was mentioned that the two most penalized teams in the SEC were LSU and whoever was playing Alabama.

[bret1555]

I can understand missed calls. . . What I cannot excuse is late flags. There were many, many plays yesterday in which the officials seemed to wait until the play had been decided before throwing a flag -- most notably, the holding.

On the "fumble," if the ball is ruled dead (the runner ruled down), play is stopped, therefore the ruling cannot be reviewed. This is not true in some plays, but makes sense in the case of a fumble. For instance, if a play is blown dead, there should be no ensuing "scramble" for the ball. . . This is why officials are supposed to err on the side of a fumble on close plays.

[johnkyblue]

Isn't it always defensive holding when inside 5 yards from the line of scrimmage?

[catfanintn]

Agree wholeheartedly. On the TV coverage, lousy camera work; many missed plays with commercials running long. Bush league.

And, though there's no proof of course, it sure looked like those refs were trying to fix this game. And I've seen a lot of UK teams get hosed over the years. Just the sheer number of calls, plus the odd plays that favored Vandy.

I don't know how an official can not hear a time out with a player and the entire coaching staff screaming in his ear. This one burns me the most.

I was at the game on that side of field about 33 rows up and got a first hand view of the panic of the UK cornerback trying to call time out because he was stranded by himself on two receivers. He and Brooks frantically tried to call time out for a number of seconds before the play started but the side judge did not move. Appeared as if Vandy had told him before the play what they were doing. Had a Vandy guy behind us laughing about it after the play saying that it definately wouldn't have happened had it been Urban Meyer (recalling the time out he got AFTER the field goal for other team was made).

[lighthouse]

It took me awhile but here's what happened on the Vandy fumble, our recovery play. Before the ball came out, one of the officials, (I have no idea which one), blew an inadvertent whistle. This killed the ball, and made the play non-reviewable. This is why we got our challenge back, but we lost our time-out. It stinks, but that's what happened.

[Brandon]

It took me awhile but here's what happened on the Vandy fumble, our recovery play. Before the ball came out, one of the officials, (I have no idea which one), blew an inadvertent whistle. This killed the ball, and made the play non-reviewable. This is why we got our challenge back, but we lost our time-out. It stinks, but that's what happened.
Then I hope that referee was disciplined. Fortunately it didn't end up affecting the outcome of the game, but it certainly could have. This is NCAA football, not kid's soccer.

[lighthouse]

I'm not Lighthouse, but I think if the pass interference is less than 15 yards from the line of scrimmage the ball is placed at the spot of the pass interference and the team given a 1st down. If the foul is over 15 yards from the line of scrimmage, then the 15 yards are assessed from the line of scrimmage and the team given a 1st down.

Thus, you can get a pass interference 3 yards down field on a third and 20 and still get a first down.

I think this is the way it works.

That's correct Larry. If the foul is within 15 yards of the LOS, it's a spot foul and an automitic first down. Rule 7, Section3, Article7, under penalty explanation.